Realpolitik CIV - An Interactive AAR
- Thread starter Lighthearter
- Start date
- Status
arya126
Squad Leader
That is right, to a point. Alot of people these days either arent educated enough, or dont have the resources/desire to get all the facts they need to make an informed decision. Alot of people, like me, dont have the experience to make some decisions, althoughi am working to fix that.
I know i am going to sound like a dictator, but this is true. Sometimes the people dont know what is right and wrong. Aand then comes the point of, what is right and wrong? Is 'right' taking away peoples liberties and freedoms to give them extra security? Or is it to become commies, and let the government regulate everything? Or is it to let anarchy descend on the nation, and let the strong survive, while the weak pay for being weak?
To say something is right, or wrong, is just to go against the nature of existence and opinions. Everyone will always have an opinion. Someone will always have a different one than the others. There is just no such thing as right and wrong.
On democracy, well, ill use a churchill quote. Hopefully i get it right. "People say democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the other ones that have been tried." That sums it up well. Direct democracy on the other hand, would just be a nightmare in the modern world. A nightmare. A representative democracy (Democratic Republic) like the usa and others have, is the best. We elect people for a reason. Its our own fault we are electing the wrong people into office. We dont try hard enough to find out what they will do, and we dont pay attention to what they do either. We just look at the news, look at it, and think its the truth.
To be honest, there will never be a perfect system, but i think what we have now is probably the best yet, and the best for a while yet too.
arya126
Squad Leader
Damn it, who hates eachother now?
Why are you so full of hate?
Well, I hate....Ayra?
HEY!
I could have sworn we had just gotten along for a few posts...
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,928
MathNerd
High on math (a, not e)
People who don't feel "experienced" enough don't have to vote. That simple!
What is "right" for a group of people can be defined in two ways: What makes the group as a whole successful or what makes each individual person more successful, where by successful, I mean happier, or something like that.
Direct democracy is based off of the principle that the collective opinions of the individuals is the opinion of the nation. Republics are based off of the principle that the collective opinions of the individuals do not equal the opinions of the nation.
IMHO, the success of a society should be measured as the sum of the successes of the individuals, so I support DD. I think my view is more liberal, and yours is... government centered and less individualistic, lets just say. I don't want to be strangled by Arya.
What is "right" for a group of people can be defined in two ways: What makes the group as a whole successful or what makes each individual person more successful, where by successful, I mean happier, or something like that.
Direct democracy is based off of the principle that the collective opinions of the individuals is the opinion of the nation. Republics are based off of the principle that the collective opinions of the individuals do not equal the opinions of the nation.
IMHO, the success of a society should be measured as the sum of the successes of the individuals, so I support DD. I think my view is more liberal, and yours is... government centered and less individualistic, lets just say. I don't want to be strangled by Arya.
The Ravus Review
Ugh you guys will turn me into a alkoholic.
Summery of War discussion
Look either the german cities or the italian cities can be a threat. The itanlian penisula looks like it has more production. The german has more food, and since rome is in slavery (remember people) that means both areas are just as good at producing troops.
I personally don't care to much about the benifits of the cities taken. I support the taking of german lands first because the plan to take them is more strategically sound. I also support NOT taking italy because of the internal strife it will cause.
Please don't start making numbers up. We don't have any screenshots showing which area has more troops. The last time Arya started going on about enemy troops and how they MUST be there LH edited them in for revenge.
The Proposed Plan for German Lands
Antium is soundly defended. By holding there no roman troops can get past and will instead just break upon our walls. Germany can be mopped up easily thanks to the culture bomb previously. It is startegically sound as it has a holding point that can be reinforced for a second push into italy if neccesary. Once germany is taken the 1st army can swing around the moutain pass. Both armies can take the two weak italian cities then converge on Rome.
This method works because it is adaptable and dependable. It allways has easy places to reinforce the front lines and means we can start to build a second army in Antium slowly so that we can strike when we are strong and they are weak.
The Proposed Plan for Italian Lands
Rush into Italy and take the first two cities. Now the 1st army is surrounded with no clear support or backup. The army will have to split in two to hold these new cities. While a second army will have to be thrown out everywhere in the north to hold of random insurgancies from german land.
This method only works if ALL cities are CONSTANTLY building troops. We'd loose a lot of units an the only reason it could work would be because of winning by numbers. not strategy.
Getting yourself surrounded by enemies is a very bad decision unless you can then force the enemy to attack you where you are strong. In this case rome could suddenly launch anywhere. We wouldn't control the battle field.
Internal Reasons for NOT taking Rome untill all roman forces are gone
The Copperheads. Please tell me everyone remembered these fanatics (who i believe are lead by the joker in a classic scheme) If we take Rome, the Capital of the Romans. Don't you think these guys will play up? Or even do Something in the middle of the war. Having a depedable war plan means we can adapt to internal problems. Marching out and getting ourselves surrounded is only going to end badly if the Coppers suddenly manage to flip antium back to rome or something stupid.
The Way to make the Italain plan work
The only way i can see to alter the Italy first plan would be to give those cities to germany instead of keep them. This way they defend them and the army advances without having to split and hold it's takings.
Of course those who want italy don't want to give it away so i'm not sure why they want a plan that makes it so hard to keep italy. The German first plan allows a better attack at italian lands. Even if russia or the Vikings launch a assault on rome the second army that has been built up in antium can suddenly spring forward as we would have due warning with the fall of the eastern Italian city. We could beat them to rome in that event.
On the internal economy
You are doing it again Arya. You are stating two things at once. That we should go all out and defeat rome (build mass troops). Or we should go all out to recover the economy (build mass libraries and markets). You are still being a reactionary opposition. The admin has no idea what you want because you contradict yourself and have still not put anything concrete down in writing for everyone to see.
On The Capital Movement
I've never actually seen you say that. Where abouts did you have in mind?
On Direct Democracy
Strangly enough i agree with Arya. In Real Life this kind of democracy is impossible to handle. It may get there in the future in advanced nations, especially with the use of the internet, but not now. I also love how in resposne the representative democracy nations are trying to block the internet
fun times. the australian attempt at building a internet 'Berlin Wall' is humoures when they claim it's to protect children but it automatically stops sites that hold things against the current government like 'Wikileaks'
But In this game, the term doesn't last long enough to be viable. I do feel that EP has become a sort of direct leader position. When a crisis happens we can vote a single person into power and grant them EP to deal with the problem.
Ugh you guys will turn me into a alkoholic.
Summery of War discussion
Look either the german cities or the italian cities can be a threat. The itanlian penisula looks like it has more production. The german has more food, and since rome is in slavery (remember people) that means both areas are just as good at producing troops.
I personally don't care to much about the benifits of the cities taken. I support the taking of german lands first because the plan to take them is more strategically sound. I also support NOT taking italy because of the internal strife it will cause.
Please don't start making numbers up. We don't have any screenshots showing which area has more troops. The last time Arya started going on about enemy troops and how they MUST be there LH edited them in for revenge.
The Proposed Plan for German Lands
Antium is soundly defended. By holding there no roman troops can get past and will instead just break upon our walls. Germany can be mopped up easily thanks to the culture bomb previously. It is startegically sound as it has a holding point that can be reinforced for a second push into italy if neccesary. Once germany is taken the 1st army can swing around the moutain pass. Both armies can take the two weak italian cities then converge on Rome.
This method works because it is adaptable and dependable. It allways has easy places to reinforce the front lines and means we can start to build a second army in Antium slowly so that we can strike when we are strong and they are weak.
The Proposed Plan for Italian Lands
Rush into Italy and take the first two cities. Now the 1st army is surrounded with no clear support or backup. The army will have to split in two to hold these new cities. While a second army will have to be thrown out everywhere in the north to hold of random insurgancies from german land.
This method only works if ALL cities are CONSTANTLY building troops. We'd loose a lot of units an the only reason it could work would be because of winning by numbers. not strategy.
Getting yourself surrounded by enemies is a very bad decision unless you can then force the enemy to attack you where you are strong. In this case rome could suddenly launch anywhere. We wouldn't control the battle field.
Internal Reasons for NOT taking Rome untill all roman forces are gone
The Copperheads. Please tell me everyone remembered these fanatics (who i believe are lead by the joker in a classic scheme) If we take Rome, the Capital of the Romans. Don't you think these guys will play up? Or even do Something in the middle of the war. Having a depedable war plan means we can adapt to internal problems. Marching out and getting ourselves surrounded is only going to end badly if the Coppers suddenly manage to flip antium back to rome or something stupid.
The Way to make the Italain plan work
The only way i can see to alter the Italy first plan would be to give those cities to germany instead of keep them. This way they defend them and the army advances without having to split and hold it's takings.
Of course those who want italy don't want to give it away so i'm not sure why they want a plan that makes it so hard to keep italy. The German first plan allows a better attack at italian lands. Even if russia or the Vikings launch a assault on rome the second army that has been built up in antium can suddenly spring forward as we would have due warning with the fall of the eastern Italian city. We could beat them to rome in that event.
On the internal economy
You are doing it again Arya. You are stating two things at once. That we should go all out and defeat rome (build mass troops). Or we should go all out to recover the economy (build mass libraries and markets). You are still being a reactionary opposition. The admin has no idea what you want because you contradict yourself and have still not put anything concrete down in writing for everyone to see.
On The Capital Movement
I've never actually seen you say that. Where abouts did you have in mind?
On Direct Democracy
Strangly enough i agree with Arya. In Real Life this kind of democracy is impossible to handle. It may get there in the future in advanced nations, especially with the use of the internet, but not now. I also love how in resposne the representative democracy nations are trying to block the internet
fun times. the australian attempt at building a internet 'Berlin Wall' is humoures when they claim it's to protect children but it automatically stops sites that hold things against the current government like 'Wikileaks' But In this game, the term doesn't last long enough to be viable. I do feel that EP has become a sort of direct leader position. When a crisis happens we can vote a single person into power and grant them EP to deal with the problem.
MathNerd
High on math (a, not e)
Awww, an actually RP related post. Now we have to get back on topic.
I think the capital, if we move it, should move to RY. I don't think we should use a bunch of hammers on a palace ATM until our economy is in a better shape.
And don't go giving LH Copperhead ideas!
EDIT: Yay! Ravus edited his post. I agree, in RL, DD can't work out for such large nations until internet access becomes more widespread. However, I like to debate about it in theory, not in reality, just like Marxism. 
I think the capital, if we move it, should move to RY. I don't think we should use a bunch of hammers on a palace ATM until our economy is in a better shape.
And don't go giving LH Copperhead ideas!
EDIT: Yay! Ravus edited his post. I agree, in RL, DD can't work out for such large nations until internet access becomes more widespread. However, I like to debate about it in theory, not in reality, just like Marxism.
MathNerd
High on math (a, not e)
If I remember right, isn't there some benefit for being on the same continent? I may be wrong though...
Right now, we're just waiting for pics from LH before we submit our plan.
Right now, we're just waiting for pics from LH before we submit our plan.
arya126
Squad Leader
Cull is right. The point of moving the capital would be to get it closer to far flung cities, so that maintenance is lower. It isnt affected by the number of cities, but rather how far from the capital the cities are.
Ill quote you Ravus, just give me a minute. You arent making sense with some of it.
EDIT: 3 people with double number posts have posted in a row. I have 811, Cull has 833, and MN has 822. Strange huh?
Ill quote you Ravus, just give me a minute. You arent making sense with some of it.
EDIT: 3 people with double number posts have posted in a row. I have 811, Cull has 833, and MN has 822. Strange huh?
arya126
Squad Leader
The Ravus Review
Ugh you guys will turn me into a alkoholic.
Summery of War discussion
Look either the german cities or the italian cities can be a threat. The itanlian penisula looks like it has more production. The german has more food, and since rome is in slavery (remember people) that means both areas are just as good at producing troops.
I personally don't care to much about the benifits of the cities taken. I support the taking of german lands first because the plan to take them is more strategically sound. I also support NOT taking italy because of the internal strife it will cause.
Please don't start making numbers up. We don't have any screenshots showing which area has more troops. The last time Arya started going on about enemy troops and how they MUST be there LH edited them in for revenge.
The Proposed Plan for German Lands
Antium is soundly defended. By holding there no roman troops can get past and will instead just break upon our walls. Germany can be mopped up easily thanks to the culture bomb previously. It is startegically sound as it has a holding point that can be reinforced for a second push into italy if neccesary. Once germany is taken the 1st army can swing around the moutain pass. Both armies can take the two weak italian cities then converge on Rome.
This method works because it is adaptable and dependable. It allways has easy places to reinforce the front lines and means we can start to build a second army in Antium slowly so that we can strike when we are strong and they are weak.
The Proposed Plan for Italian Lands
Rush into Italy and take the first two cities. Now the 1st army is surrounded with no clear support or backup. The army will have to split in two to hold these new cities. While a second army will have to be thrown out everywhere in the north to hold of random insurgancies from german land.
This method only works if ALL cities are CONSTANTLY building troops. We'd loose a lot of units an the only reason it could work would be because of winning by numbers. not strategy.
Getting yourself surrounded by enemies is a very bad decision unless you can then force the enemy to attack you where you are strong. In this case rome could suddenly launch anywhere. We wouldn't control the battle field.
Internal Reasons for NOT taking Rome untill all roman forces are gone
The Copperheads. Please tell me everyone remembered these fanatics (who i believe are lead by the joker in a classic scheme) If we take Rome, the Capital of the Romans. Don't you think these guys will play up? Or even do Something in the middle of the war. Having a depedable war plan means we can adapt to internal problems. Marching out and getting ourselves surrounded is only going to end badly if the Coppers suddenly manage to flip antium back to rome or something stupid.
The Way to make the Italain plan work
The only way i can see to alter the Italy first plan would be to give those cities to germany instead of keep them. This way they defend them and the army advances without having to split and hold it's takings.
Of course those who want italy don't want to give it away so i'm not sure why they want a plan that makes it so hard to keep italy. The German first plan allows a better attack at italian lands. Even if russia or the Vikings launch a assault on rome the second army that has been built up in antium can suddenly spring forward as we would have due warning with the fall of the eastern Italian city. We could beat them to rome in that event.
On the internal economy
You are doing it again Arya. You are stating two things at once. That we should go all out and defeat rome (build mass troops). Or we should go all out to recover the economy (build mass libraries and markets). You are still being a reactionary opposition. The admin has no idea what you want because you contradict yourself and have still not put anything concrete down in writing for everyone to see.
On The Capital Movement
I've never actually seen you say that. Where abouts did you have in mind?
On Direct Democracy
Strangly enough i agree with Arya. In Real Life this kind of democracy is impossible to handle. It may get there in the future in advanced nations, especially with the use of the internet, but not now. I also love how in resposne the representative democracy nations are trying to block the internet
But In this game, the term doesn't last long enough to be viable. I do feel that EP has become a sort of direct leader position. When a crisis happens we can vote a single person into power and grant them EP to deal with the problem.
1. Actually, i do have spotty intel from LH in chat, that germany is heavily defended compared to settia and medialanum.
2. Please tell me how we would be surrounded if we took italy?
3. We would bring the same garrison to hold these 2 cities as we would to germany, maybe even less as they would be out of the way from the frontline.
4. I dont see how germany is won by strategy rather than numbers. Numbers is strategy in CIV.
5. How would we control the battlefield by attacking germany?
6. The copperheads are being taken care of in a narrative update by LH remember? That will be resolved, and we will find out where we stand with them. Worst comes to worst, they are a shadow of their former selves thanks to me. I wish them luck reatking antium when its garrison is huge. If they wreak havoc, then i hunt them down with the HDO. Simple.
7. Im NOT contradicting myself. Why would we focus on fixing the economy in a war? Its common sense. I said somewhere that this would be in peace, or i thought i did.
When i talked about fixing the economy, i assumed that if we were focusing on it we would be at peace. This was all a discussion on the FUTURE, not the NOW.
8. Dont use stereotypes by all representative countries are 'blocking'; the internet. The usa isnt. Thats all that matters to me. The rest of the world can burn when they become rulked by dictators and we end up having to liberate them.
9. Ill think of something else...
10. Thouight of it. Well, Reactionary oppositions are fun.
11. Now i really am done.
12. Or not. And MN, if people who arent 'experienced' enough to vote decided not to (since i will fight any government that tried to actually stop them), then we would lose 80% of our votes here in the usa. Its that bad. But thats what makes this a free country, and thats what makes it great. You can decide whether you want to get involved and pay attention or not. I am the former of course.
Whosit
Entropic Knight
You know, if the bulk of the Roman army is in Germany, then that is precisely where we want to attack. I know I would rather face the enemy's strongest forces while I have the initiative, rather than the other way around. If they have an army designed for attack, and we force it to defend, we have the advantage. Just needs lots and lots of siege.
Though, MN already sent in the plan, so is this redundant at this point?
Numbers vs. Strategy: Well, it would be a lie to say that numbers don't matter, but that's not the whole story. A smaller force, even a weaker force, can win if they are led competently. Keeping to defensive terrain is the most basic thing to do. Having the right units for the job is the second. Etc., etc. But, of course, there is always an amount of force that cannot be opposed without equal force.
And we do have to keep the economy running during the war. If we let it collapse, it will be that much harder to fix it afterwards. Iberia should be mostly developed by now, though, so I don't think we'll have to spam Workers (a few more shouldn't hurt, of course).
I think I'll just see what LH throws at us next, since it's really out of my hands at the moment.
Though, MN already sent in the plan, so is this redundant at this point?
Numbers vs. Strategy: Well, it would be a lie to say that numbers don't matter, but that's not the whole story. A smaller force, even a weaker force, can win if they are led competently. Keeping to defensive terrain is the most basic thing to do. Having the right units for the job is the second. Etc., etc. But, of course, there is always an amount of force that cannot be opposed without equal force.
And we do have to keep the economy running during the war. If we let it collapse, it will be that much harder to fix it afterwards. Iberia should be mostly developed by now, though, so I don't think we'll have to spam Workers (a few more shouldn't hurt, of course).
I think I'll just see what LH throws at us next, since it's really out of my hands at the moment.
Good good, as long as we don't get any worldbuildered in units i'm happy
2. Please tell me how we would be surrounded if we took italy?
3. We would bring the same garrison to hold these 2 cities as we would to germany, maybe even less as they would be out of the way from the frontline.
What's the american historical example... General Custard? Settia and medialanum may be undefended. But the german cities and rome won't be. That means we will suddenly have large roman forces that can stike at either setia, Medialanum, Antium or the french cities. Unlike if we advanced into germany where we would only have to deal with the standing army there and reinforcements from one direction. Advancing into Itlay leaves us open to attacks from multiple directions.
The garrison thing we would need less troops to hold the german cities then we would the italian cities. the Italian cities would need MORE as they would have Rome 3 move away from them. The german cities once taken have NO roman reinforcement lines except through the east and around medialanum. Which the main army can advance towards cutting them off. I don't know how better to describe it. I've used basic strategic language so the only thing left would be to draw you a map and hope you understood then. *shrug*
I have given reasons why i think the way i do but you seem to be making statements without saying anything to describe your own opinions.
Um no. Using numbers is a single strategy. Called beating the other person through overwhelming strength. Taking germany can be done by a single army and is a single campiagn. Once germany has taken we could stop or continue. Taking Setia and then Medialanum would force us to have to continue to take out everything. We would be alone in hostile territory. We'd HAVE to take Rome to keep setia and Medialanum safe and we'd have to fight in the field around germany to stop the pillaging runs and small units moving there. It would be choatic.
Do i really have to attempt to draw that map or has the dialogues above helped you understand the points i am making?
Um you mean you hope it will be resolved. Unfortunatly no one thinks we can totally trust you and i myself believe that the new leader of the copperheads is the joker from your joker party. They may be weaker but they will also be now more extreme. Before we could have painted the breakaway germans as the true heirs to the roman throne and Julius as a dictator. Or something. We would have had options. Now we have few.
Just to make sure, your plan is to break things untill the copperheads see your way, right? (once again a clear statement would be helpful)
And what is the HDO?
I'm afraid you did and you do. You were painting your arguement to be current and not a potential future. It's nice to know now, and i do agree once we get peace a rebuilding effort would be good.
The contradicting thing is done many times. You stated you would reveal reasons for your terrorist actions in the future. Then you changed your mind and said that you had reasons but you wouldn't tell anyone.
You also stated that you would give a statement of opposition policy and have now apparantly decided that you enjoy being reactionary. Thus now contradicting yourself.
Um i'm afriad while it doesn't have a Berlin wall of censorship there have allready been attempts to do something. Which was why i used the word "trying"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_the_United_States
You do realise that kind of "let everyone else burn" stereotyping is why so many of the other nations hate the USA? The only reason things didn't detoriate futher was because many hoped that Obama would move things in a better direction. It's actually quite horrifying in some places the hatred people have for the USA. Not the people itself but that nation. Well... some hate certain areas. Honestly it's just not nice to go out and bring up the USA topic in some places.
No idea what this comment is in lieu of.
Thus contradicting yourself. Did you ever truely have a desire to proove yourself to everyone or was it just a way you thought to calm everyone whithout delivering on promises?
MathNerd
High on math (a, not e)
First, I just sent LH a rough draft and told him not to play the turnset until we get a bunch of pics. Second, RL is limiting my access right now, and when I leave for vacation, my internet access will basically plummet. For now, we wait for pics from LH, I guess.
EDIT: I think that the plan is OK the way it is, except for the fact that it's quite vague when it comes to units and city builds.
EDIT: I think that the plan is OK the way it is, except for the fact that it's quite vague when it comes to units and city builds.
Actually, I'm kinda in favor of moving the capital to Antium or Amsterdam since they're in the middle.
Well, as others have pointed out, Antium IS a fortress, therefore, if we take Germany, then Rome will have a heck of a time busting out of Italy if we defend it enough. So, yeah. I'm now in favor of attacking Germany. It's how many? 2 cities? One campaign with sufficient numbers will take care of that. And weren't we absorbing the balkans or something?
And we do need more pics. And when's the summary coming out?
Well, as others have pointed out, Antium IS a fortress, therefore, if we take Germany, then Rome will have a heck of a time busting out of Italy if we defend it enough. So, yeah. I'm now in favor of attacking Germany. It's how many? 2 cities? One campaign with sufficient numbers will take care of that. And weren't we absorbing the balkans or something?
And we do need more pics. And when's the summary coming out?
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,928
What the point of moving the capital to a city just a few tiles south? If anything, just build the FP there if we really need to (which we don't).
arya126
Squad Leader
I agree with sonereal, although that may be because i dont like ever moving the capital, even if its just that england wouyldnt be england if London wasnt the capital.
- Status
